If I would like to do LLM not because of wanting to become an academia, but for future career prospect, should I be frank about it when putting it on personal statement to LSE? Do they prefer candidates who determine to become scholar?

I don't know if the admissions committee prefers candidates who plan to enter academia, but I have to think that it is quite common for students to study for the LL.M. and not want to become an academic. Most students in my courses last year had no interest in applying to doctorate programmes.

You should decide for yourself what you think will be the best course, and I don't want you to take my opinion as if it is a valuable opinion (That would be giving it too much credit.), but I would simply write about what motivates you to follow LSE's LL.M. programme and how attending LSE fits into your future plans. I don't think you need to address why you don't want to be an academic because it is not an obstacle to gaining admission, generally.

Others, of course, are free to disagree with me, and their comments would be valuable here.

hi P_Martini...i fully agree with you...it doesnt matter whether you want to enter into academia or you want to go the commercial route after completing your LL.M. All that matters is that you state with conviction what your plans are and there should be clarity in your thought process. they must be able to ascertain exactly why you're applying for the LL.M and what you want to do..thats all that matters. Its not so much what you want to do after your LL.M but how you put your plans across..i think that's the real clincher. being vague and evasive wont help, neither will stating things that you dont plan to do merely in order to impress them.

Hey guys,

Ive applied to Cambridge for the LL.M for 2009, and I am planning to apply to LSE for the LL.M as well. My interest is Banking/ Securities/ Corporate...Any ideas on which school offers the better program? and which is more highly rated..????
I note that Cambridge is at the top of the Times list for 2009, and LSE is in third place but for a specialised LL.M, is Cambridge really the better choice?

I'm not at all interested in Oxford. Please tell me your views/experiences..!

I think LSE would be a better choice as compared to Cambridge. Cambridge has a better brand value, but from what ive seen, the courses are somewhat old school...LSE would offer a much better and more contemporary range of courses to pick from.

Thanks san_24, I must say I agree with you!

You're most welcome caribbeanstar..all the best with your applications..i hope you make it!! :-)

carribeanstar:

I studied at LSE, so I am biased. Strangely, however, I still don't know enough about the Cambridge programme to say which is really better. And it's subjective anyway. Note that one is in London and the other not in London. Cambridge is a great place, but it's just different. All I can say is "Good luck!" and I hope you do have the luxury of choosing between them.

they are both likely to get you a job interview...,

that said id still go to cambridge for the name.

As to global reputation, LSE can match Oxbridge and Harvard/Yale, despite the fact that it is a specialist institution for economics and the social sciences. All the other schools in the same category are large federal universities offering diverse courses in the pure and applied sciences, social sciences and the liberal arts. LSE has a lower acceptance rate than most schools, with approximately 8% of the total number of applicants accepted to attend. LSE has a number of its alumni serving as heads of state and other key positions in the cabinet and the other levels of government. A number of LSE alumni are well-known economists, financiers and corporate executives. In terms of prestige within the United Kingdom, I would say Oxford, Cambridge and LSE in that order. In the United States, it is a perennial toss-up between Yale and Harvard. A number of LSE alumni are also graduates of Harvard and Yale, such as President John F. Kennedy, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin and Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker. Three senior White House advisers recently appointed by President-elect Obama are likewise LSE alumni. Of course, it is all a matter of personal choice. Former Singapore Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew and the economist John Maynard Keynes are distinguished alumni of Cambridge.

haha so much detail. like i said, both will get you an interview. And JFK went to LSE for about a week.

One may play dice with the Cambridge v. LSE choice and still come out ahead. Both schools will open doors, so it becomes a personal choice on the part of a successful applicant, where his academic and career objectives would be met. The myth about JFK seems to have contributed to the popularity of LSE in America, especially among Ivy League alumni. LSE has this "junior year abroad" programme which attracts a number of Americans from U.S. universities for one year before finishing their bachelor's degree at their home institution.